Jun. 10, 2026 - Regular Planning Board Meeting

|

350 East Main Road, Middletown, RI 02842 (401) 849-4027 | MiddletownRI.com |

PLANNING BOARD MINUTES

Regular Meeting

June 10, 2026, 6pm

Town Council Chambers – Town Hall

350 East Main Road

Middletown, RI 02842

Board members present:

Paul Croce, Chair

Charlie Vaillancourt

Matt Skirzenski

Art Weber

Members absent

B.J. Owen

Joe Pierik

Steve Huttler

Also present

Ron Wolanski, Town Planner

Michael Monti, Assistant Town Solicitor

Rudy Botros, Principal Planner

Chairman Croce called the meeting to order at 6:00pm.

• Mr. Croce noted that item 7 on page 2 should read that the Town Council would consider a draft plan regarding “the general plan for infrastructure, water, sewer” from the Planning Board.
• Motion by Mr. Weber, seconded by Mr. Vaillancourt- Vote:4-0-0.
• Mr. Croce noted that on the bottom of page 3, the motion to approve the waiver was 4-2 with Mr. Pierik and Mr. Croce voting against.
• Motion by Mr. Weber, seconded by Mr. Vaillancourt- Vote:4-0-0.

a. Memo of the Town Planner dated June 9, 2026 re. SB Farm – Application of SB Farm LLC Master Plan approval for a Major Land Development Project.

• Motion by Mr. Skirzenski, seconded by Mr. Weber- Vote:4-0-0.

a. Mr. Croce recommended that Items 4.a and 4.b be tabled.

b. Motion by Mr. Weber, seconded by Mr. Vaillancourt to table items 4.a and 4.b. Vote: 4-0-0.

c. Mr. Croce recommended that item 5.a be continued to the next Planning Board meeting on July 8, 2026.

d. Motion by Mr. Weber, seconded by Mr. Vaillancourt to continue item 5.a to the next Planning Board meeting on July 8, 2026. Vote: 4-0-0.

a. Discussion of, and recommendation to the Town Council on proposed design requirements and other restrictions for multi-family residential development, including proposed amendments to Middletown Zoning Ordinance Section 1508 – Building Design and Location; proposed amendments to the Use Table in the Middletown Zoning Ordinance; Section 602 – Schedule of District Regulations – Uses and Districts – Multi-family dwelling structure & Multi-family dwelling project to allow the uses in the R-10, R-20 and R-30 zoning districts by special use permit; Section 603 regarding dimensional requirements for two-family dwelling, multi-family dwelling structure, and multi-family dwelling project; and Section 1504 regarding allowable density for multifamily dwelling structure and multifamily dwelling project.

i. Tabled

b. Request of the Town Council for review and recommendation on a draft complete streets ordinance.

i. Tabled

a. Public Hearing – Application of Kathryn Thomson for Preliminary Plan approval for a 2-lot minor subdivision, including request for variances from Town Code Chapter 152, Zoning Code, Section 603, for lots with 104.44 and 104.98 feet of street frontage where 120’ feet of frontage is required; from Section 720 (B) to allow creation of lots in the Traffic Sensitive District with 104.44 and 104.98 feet of street frontage where 300’ feet of frontage is required, and from Section 720(C)(1) requiring use of a common driveway to access the resulting lots. Property located at 534 Aquidneck Ave., and further identified as Tax Assessors Plat 114, Lot 116.

i. Continued to the next Planning Board meeting on July 8, 2026.

b. Public Hearing – Request of Saltwood Farm Development, LLC, the developer of the Saltwood Farm Subdivision for approval to modify the approved subdivision plan by further subdividing Lot 9 (A.P. 126, Lot 409) consisting of 55,573 square feet into two lots: Lot 9A consisting of 34,745 square feet and Lot 9B consisting of 20,828 square feet, with each lot containing an existing residential dwelling.

i. Motion by Mr. Weber, seconded by Mr. Skirzenski to open the public hearing. Vote: 4-0-0.

ii. Atty. David Martland on behalf of the applicant Peter Galipeau owner of Saltwood Farm Development LLC., described the subdivision of what is currently lot 9 on the approved subdivision plan. Lot 9 contains a single-family home with a garage/ADU. The project had been approved by the Board on January 22, 2009 for a 14-lot subdivision. Lot 9 was originally supposed to be two lots, one with the single-family home and the other with the garage/ADU. That same configuration is what is proposed again now. RIDEM soil maps showed this area had a pocket of stissing soil and was part of zone 1 of the watershed protection district. Although the applicant contended that the maps were in error, the Zoning Board did not grant the Special Use Permit for a single-family dwelling on that lot. Therefore, the two lots that comprised lot 9 were merged together on the preliminary and final plan subdivision approval in 2014. Since then RIDEM has updated their wetland maps as they do periodically, not by request of Peter Galipeau. The new maps do not show the property as containing these hydric soils nor is it located in zone 1 of the watershed protection district. This allows lot 9 to be subdivided as had been originally planned. The lots will meet all dimensional requirements, with one lot containing the single-family home significantly larger than the other containing the garage/ADU. This would allow the garage/ADU to be converted into a single-family dwelling unit in the future.

iii. Mr. Weber asked why the lots were significantly different in size. PE Lynn Small who originally worked on the project in 2009 explained that the drainage system as well as utilities and civil plans remained the same throughout the plan’s history, accounting for the additional lots. Ms. Small explained that the lots are as is because they were divided between both structures. However, both lots met the minimum size requirement of 15,000 sf. The smaller of the two is about 20,000 sf which is usually required in a R-20 district. 15,000 sf is required in a conservation development.

iv. Mr. Croce referenced a Road and Utilities comment regarding stormwater runoff affecting other lots. Ms. Small explained that if at some point the garage/ADU is converted into a single-family unit the applicant would review the stormwater management plan with Town Engineer John Mello as part of the building permiting process.

v. Mr. Croce requested comments from the public.

vi. Martha Kozera of 8 Miller Street, a neighbor of Mr. Galipeau asked for clarification as to which dwelling maybe become a single-family home in the future. Mr. Galipeau explained that it was the garage/ADU. Mr. Martland went over the planed proposal for clarification.

vii. Motion by Mr. Weber, seconded Mr. Vaillancourt to close the public hearing. Vote: 4-0-0.

viii. Motion by Mr. Vaillancourt, seconded by Mr. Skirzenski to approve the request to modify the previously approved subdivision subject to the findings. Vote: 4-0-0:

c. Public Hearing – Application of The Collection on Honeyman, LLC for Preliminary Plan approval for a 4-lot minor subdivision, including creation of a new public street. A waiver is requested from Section 603 of the Middletown Rules and Regulations Regarding the Subdivision and Development of Land to allow a street with pavement width of 22 feet where 26 feet is required. Property fronting on Honeyman Ave., and further identified as Tax Assessors Plat 114, Lot 139.

i. Mr. Croce confirmed with Mr. Wolanski that the request was for 24 and not 22 feet of street width.

ii. Motion by Mr. Weber, seconded by Mr. Vaillancourt to open the public hearing. Vote: 4-0-0.

iii. PE and Land Surveyor Chris Duhamel of Diprete Engineering, represented the applicant Louis Calcagni. Mr. Duhamel described the 4-lot subdivision of a 3-acre parcel with a 173 feet of frontage on Honeyman Avenue.

iv. Mr. Weber interjected to recommend that the Planning Board carry out a site visit.

v. Mr. Duhamel reviewed the project stating the site does not contain wetlands. The soil is silt loom with groundwater perched at 18 to 22 inches. There is public water and public sewer on Honeyman Road. There is a sewer easement on Turner Rd extended to the parcel. The site is zoned R-20 and each of the 4 lots has a minimum of 20,000 sf. The subdivision has a minimum of 120 ft of frontage and 50 ft of width for each lot on the cul de sac. Lot sizes range from 23,0000 to 34,000 sf. A public road of about 267 feet to the center of the cul de sac and 300 ft in total length, at 1 percent slope, with 24 feet of width is proposed. Honeyman Road itself is 22 feet wide. The applicant is requesting two 11 ft travel lanes and one foot of Cape Cod berm on each side. Lot 1 will have access to the existing sewer lateral on Honeyman Road while Lots 2 thru 4 will have a private sewer extension that connects to Turner Road through the sewer easement. The TRC committee requested that the sewer system remain as a private system to be maintained by residents of the 4-lot subdivision. Newport Water and Middletown Fire have approved the project confirming that the fire hydrant and fire truck access is suitable. Electric and telephone lines will be underground. The stormwater management system allows the pavement in lots 1 and 2 to drain to an extended dry detention basin. Water quality is improved with a jellyfish sewer manhole leading to the stormwater management system. Runoff from the site is being mitigated to present conditions for the 1 to 100 year storm. Discharge out of the drainage basis is through the drainage easement containing a 12 inch culvert in a 6 foot easement over the land of the seller. There is no increase in runoff from pre to post development. The entire watershed that drains to Turner Rd is reduced in volume by the stormwater management system.

vi. Mr. Weber asked if the other three houses in the area had access to sewer and why the sewer would remain private. Mr. Duhamel explained that the 4 lots in total, not just the 3 that utilize the easement will fund the maintenance of the sewer through escrow. He went on to explain that this was the typical way Homeowner’s Associations work. Sewers not located in the right of way is usually maintained by the HOA.

vii. Mr. Wolanski explained that in this case the sewer is inside of a private easement and so the town would not have access to maintain it.

viii. Mr. Duhamel explained that it was a gravity system with no pumps associated with it and so it would be easy to maintain. He described the landscape plan and the trees along the right of way. Mr. Duhamel explained that this was the first time this subdivision came in front of the Board as the applicant had not requested Master Plan review and chose to ask for Preliminary plan review with all permits.

ix. Mr. Skirzenski asked how the size of the detention basin was decided. Mr. Duhamel explained that it was based on the existing runoff from the site before any development. Creating more impervious surfaces such as roofs and roads increases the runoff coefficient which has to be captured and mitigated through the on site stormwater drainage system.

x. Mr. Croce asked why the detention pond is located in the northeast when page 4 of the Development Impact Statement indicates a significant grade towards the southeast corner of the parcel. Mr. Duhamel explained that they could not secure a drainage outlet in the southeast so runoff in the northern area was captured and routed to the detention basin. Runoff from the areas east of the cul de sac were captured in drywells.

xi. Mr. Croce also asked if the property was tested since it was previously used for agriculture as stated on page 5 of the Development Impact Statement. Mr. Duhamel answered that no soil analysis was conducted.

xii. Although there was no sidewalk on Honeyman Road currently, Mr. Croce requested the installation of a sidewalk at least on one side of the right of way and around the cul de sac. Mr. Duhamel answered that he felt it was unnecessary. However, Mr. Croce asked to make it a condition for approval.

xiii. Mr. Croce initiated a discussion regarding the slope at lot 4 described in the Roads and Utilities Committee comment. It was agreed that Mr. Duhamel would work with the Town Engineer Mr. Mello to accommodate the town’s request to leave space for a swale.

xiv. Mr. Duhamel confirmed that they could accommodate the Tree Commission’s request to add an additional street tree along the right of way.

xv. Mr. Croce requested comments from the public.

xvi. Kathleen Mitchell of 447 Turner Rd, an abutter, wanted to confirm that the drainage easement along her driveway would not encroach on her property. She was concerned because the plans do not indicate the dimensions of the easement. Mr. Duhamel explained that it was an easement granted by the seller and is on the seller’s property. Mr. Croce asked that Mr. Duhamel provide Ms. Mitchell a document to confirm.

xvii. Kathleen Kroger of 215 Honeyman Road, is an abutter directly north of the house currently being built. Ms. Kroger expressed her concern regarding stormwater runoff and claimed there was a pond that was filled in which exasperated the runoff issues. She was also concerned because of the likelihood of contaminated soil resulting from the previous agricultural use of the property. No soil testing has been carried out. Ms. Kroger argued that because of poor sediment control practices the air quality has deteriorated. Ms. Kroger also questioned why the runoff did not follow the natural grade of the property. She stated that because the land in the area is mostly shale it does not percolate well and so it was likely the private sewer would need regular maintenance. Mr. Duhamel answered that the state maps did not show any wetlands on the property and that no runoff from the parcels would be routed to her property since it would be captured by a swale that directs runoff to the detention pond which is then discharged by a 12 inch culvert under the drainage easement to Turner Road. Mr. Kroger requested that the Board conduct a site visit.

xviii. Mr. Wolanski reviewed the permitting process which requires stormwater management plan approval by the town engineer before final plan approval and the beginning of construction.

xix. Mr. Kroger stated that she will discuss her concerns with the Building Department whose job it is to monitor construction. She also will contact RIDEM to get the soil tested.

xx. Mr. Vaillancourt explained that if the soil was found to be contaminated, RIDEM would halt the project despite town approval.

xxi. Charles McBain of 475 Turner Road, to the southeast of the property at lot 143. Mr. McBain’s property is located in the area where the proposed subdivision naturally drains to. He was concerned because the detention pond to the north sits at 181 ft while his lot is at 170 ft elevation. Lots 3 and 4 will have drywells that are about 30 inches deep and the water table is anywhere from 12 to 24 inches deep. This may increases the possibility of flooding along the southeast boundary because of the new stormwater drainage system in place. Mr. McBain asked for more soil erosion protection than just a silt fence. Mr. McBain also asked if the plan proposes connecting to the existing sewer through the easement running through his property to Turner Road or will it the existing sewer require excavation.

xxii. Mr. Duhamel reiterated how the stormwater management plan will reduce runoff to the southeast corner and that there was a soil erosion control plan that will have regular inspection. Mr. Duhamel explained that the existing sewer did not require replacement and therefore no excavation was necessary.

xxiii. Motion by Mr. Weber, seconded by Mr. Vaillancourt to close the public hearing. Vote: 6-0-0.

xxiv. Mr. Weber again recommended a site visit and that the soil is tested. He suggested that the application be continued to the next meeting.

xxv. Motion by Mr. Weber, seconded by Mr. Skirzenski to reopen the public hearing. Vote: 6-0-0.

xxvi. Applicant Louis Calcagni, asked where the regulation that requires a sidewalk can be found. Mr. Wolanski explained that town ordinances recommend sidewalks in all types of subdivisions.

xxvii. In response to abutter concerns regarding stormwater management, Mr. Calcagni explained that living next to undeveloped land, inherently puts neighbors more at risk of flooding than a property that’s engineered and designed to drain and retain all of its own stormwater on site and has undergone peer review.

xxviii. Motion by Mr. Weber, seconded by Mr. Vaillancourt to continue item 5.c to the next Planning Board meeting on July 8, 2026. Vote: 4-0-0.

• Application of The Collection on Valley Road, LLC (EJ Lanni) for Preliminary Plan approval of a Major Land Development Project for a proposed addition of approximately 6,796 square feet of floor area to an existing commercial building. Property located in the office business, traffic sensitive (OBA) zoning district at 345 Valley Road, and further identified as Tax Assessors Plat 114, Lot 1C.

i. Motion by Mr. Skirzenski, seconded by Mr. Vaillancourt to continue item 5.d to the next Planning Board meeting on July 8, 2026. Vote: 4-0-0.

• Proposed Planning Board recommendation to the Town Council to add a Planning Board member to serve on the Middletown Economic Development Advisory Committee with recommendation to appoint Steven Huttler to this position.

i. Motion by Mr. Skirzenski, seconded by Mr. Vaillancourt to continue item 5.e to the next Planning Board meeting on July 8, 2026 with the modification that it reads non-voting liaison member. Vote: 4-0-0.

• Presentation by Planning Board member Matthew Skirzenski on matters related to housing supply and production.

i. A special meeting will be held to hear the presentation in the future.

• Planning Board recommendation to the Town Council on a proposed inclusionary zoning ordinance amendment to the Middletown Zoning Ordinance, Town Code Chapter 152.

i. Motion by Mr. Weber, seconded by Mr. Vaillancourt to continue item 5.g to the next Planning Board meeting on July 8, 2026. Vote: 4-0-0.

• Consideration of establishing a Planning Board subcommittee to study and make recommendations on potential creation of a wastewater management district and a stormwater utility.

i. Chairmen Croce created a subcommittee chaired by Mr. Weber that includes Mr. Vaillancourt and himself.

• Planning Board recommendation to the Town Council on a proposed voluntary historic resource preservation incentive program.

i. Motion by Mr. Weber, seconded by Mr. Vaillancourt to continue item 5.i to the next Planning Board meeting on July 8, 2026. Vote: 4-0-0.

• Status Report on Planning Board action items

i. Mr. Wolanski updated the Board on the status of the Comprehensive Plan. A comparison with the previous plan was soon to be completed at which point the Planning Board would decide if they wanted to move forward with the comp plan or wait for feedback from the state first.

ii. Mr. Croce indicated that the Planning Board has initiated action on all 8 of the items on the report.

• Updates on Committee Activity

i. Tree Commission

1. Ms. Owen was not in attendance.

ii. Open Space and Fields Committee

1. Chairmen Nick Coogan has stepped down and a new chairman must be selected.

2. Mr. Coogan has been tasked with communicating with Mr. Brown regarding progress made on an inquiry into the boundaries of the property at the bridge leading to Kampenaar’s Clam Bake.

iii. Conservation Commission

1. Mr. Skirzenski indicated they have a tentative meeting date of June 24th subject to a quorum. The date change will allow for more time to review applications before they are presented to the Planning Board.

iv. Middletown Center Citizens Advisory Committee

1. Mr. Huttler was not in attendance.

v. Miscellaneous Items

1. Mr. Weber asked Mr. Monti about the status regarding the Multi-Family zoning ordinance. He stated that it was his opinion that intensification of zoning on this scale should be an electoral issue for townspeople to vote on.

• Upcoming meetings:

i. Regular Planning Board meeting – July 8, 2026, 6pm

Motion by Mr. Vaillancourt, seconded by Mr. Skirzenski to adjourn the meeting. Vote: 6-0-0

Meeting adjourned at approximately 7:39 pm.

Respectfully submitted,

Arthur S. Weber, Jr., Secretary